Weird Unnatural Links Warning in GWT - Anyone?

One of my sites got that warning a few weeks ago (I feel like in a movie: I've heard so much about that and now I SEE it!)

Anyway, apart from my being puzzled as to the reasoning of it (I don't recall building any "keyword" links to it; if I link to the site from my articles, I use name or URL not to "manipulate" anything lol; the site earns regular natural links and 95% of it's home page links are name and different variations of it; links to deep pages are absolutely natural (these are articles that earn links from round-ups and such)); again, apart from the unclear reason, I haven't seen any impact on rankings or search traffic (not that I am complaining...)

So my question is: What to do

I know I sound like anyone in that situation, but I honestly don't know where to start as I don't feel guilty

The only thing I've been doing "wrong" was linking to it from a random article I write (if it makes sense) - so it's kind of linking to yourself without nofollow; but again I've never really used keywords not to effect rankings...

Here's how the warning sounds:

Unnatural inbound links
March 14, 2013

We've detected that some of the links pointing to your site are using techniques outside Google's Webmaster Guidelines.

We don't want to put any trust in links that are unnatural or artificial, and we recommend removing any unnatural links to your site. However, we do realize that some links may be outside of your control. As a result, for this specific incident we are taking very targeted action to reduce trust in the unnatural links. If you are able to remove any of the links, you can submit a reconsideration request, including the actions that you took.

If you have any questions, please visit our Webmaster Help Forum.

As you can see, they are kind of suggeting I might be innocent but still recommend submitting a reconsideration request (?) I am not sure what they want to reconsider lol
And it doesn't look too scary as there is no sign next to it

I have a lot of sites, so I don't check GWT that often, so I was really late to notice the warning (it was left a couple of weeks ago)

What you've received looks like one of those benign notifications that is simply telling you that they're not too sure about the source/nature of some of your links, so they've devalued some. Have you seen any significant impact to your rankings?

@Doc, no I haven't seen any impact... on the 25th of December GWT sent me "Lower search click-through" warning but a couple of days all the traffic and rankings were back, so I just thought that was a regular Christmas flux... Otherwise, I haven't seen or noticed anything strange...

What puzzles me is why they invite me to submit a reconsideration request? What they want to reconsider? I am fine with them devaluing some of my links but why they invite me to try to get rid of them and submit the request? Since links are already devalued, what will change if I delete them?

Ann I still believe G wants webmasters to send in a list of known link spam, to build this information into a database to combat spam. The more help from the public the easier their job is looking for it. I'm assuming the reconsider letter is telling them to pay attention to this list, otherwise the list is just done with a computer.
But that just a guess.

Comments on this post

Ann Smarty agrees
: So basically they want me to do my own backlink profile analysis for them? :) Interesting! That's why they always insist on that reconsideration request to be detailed :)

Ann I still believe G wants webmasters to send in a list of known link spam, to build this information into a database to combat spam. The more help from the public the easier their job is looking for it.

Rubbish!

Originally Posted by Test-ok

I'm assuming the reconsider letter is telling them to pay attention to this list, otherwise the list is just done with a computer.

But that just a guess.

You don't need to send any reconsideration request... this wasn't a manual review it was an automatic notification.

Comments on this post

Doc Sheldon agrees
: Agreed. No need to ever to a recon for an algo issue.

@Doc, no I haven't seen any impact... on the 25th of December GWT sent me "Lower search click-through" warning but a couple of days all the traffic and rankings were back, so I just thought that was a regular Christmas flux...

There was some "routine" fluctuation around then, so since it recovered, you're probably right.

I am fine with them devaluing some of my links but why they invite me to try to get rid of them and submit the request? Since links are already devalued, what will change if I delete them?

Sometimes, they don't devalue 100%, Ann. They might knock them down by 30%, 50%, 75%... who knows? Personally, I wouldn't be too concerned, but that's just me. Ignoring anything they say is a calculated risk, I'll grant. If you've taken a look at your link profile and feel relatively comfortable with the quality of your links, then I'd suggest you just keep a close eye on things for a few weeks. If you have any links that you think are questionable, just reach out to the webmasters and try to get them nofollowed or removed (or anchor modified, if that makes more sense).

If you'd like a second set of eyes on the profile, feel free to skype me, and I'd be happy to help you out.

If you are able to remove any of the links, you can submit a reconsideration request, including the actions that you took.

which is in every notice I've ever seen. What other reason would that be in ever message?
It seems to me to be some kind of scare tactic to get information that their not able to get.
Like I said it's only a guess. But please entertain me with another reason why it's in every unnatural link message.

Looks like you've got your question answered Ann. Your message is the same as a pile of them that went out in July. For the vast majority of them, as fathom quoted, the message really meant nothing. Plus, the fact that you have no yellow caution sign and no drop in rankings supports that idea.

The vast majority of sites that had these warnings never were penalized. However, there are some, as in the information given in the link, that were penalized for perhaps a single keyword. Here is a quote from the article:

These new messages are worth your attention. Fundamentally, it means we're distrusting some links to your site. We often take this action when we see a site that is mostly good but might have some spammy or artificial links pointing to it (widgetbait, paid links, blog spam, guestbook spam, excessive article directory submissions, excessive link exchanges, other types of linkspam, etc.). So while the site's overall rankings might not drop directly, likewise the site might not be able to rank for some phrases. I wouldn't classify these messages as purely advisory or something to be ignored, or only for innocent sites.

On the other hand, I don't want site owners to panic. We do use this message some of the time for innocent sites where people are pointing hacked anchor text to their site to try to make them rank for queries like [buy viagra].

I would say that if you haven't noticed a drop in rankings for any keywords then I would do nothing. I'd probably do a thorough analysis of my backlinks to make sure there is no weird "buy viagra" type of hacking going on. But, if not, then I wouldn't remove links and I wouldn't file for reconsideration.

Sometimes though, a site can get a warning and then it can take a few days for the penalty to hit. So, if you start noticing a significant drop in keyword ranking then I'd reassess the situation.

Comments on this post

Doc Sheldon agrees
: If Ann's link profile is relatively clean, I think she can safely ignore this, as a benign notice.

which is in every notice I've ever seen. What other reason would that be in ever message?
It seems to me to be some kind of scare tactic to get information that their not able to get.
Like I said it's only a guess. But please entertain me with another reason why it's in every unnatural link message.

If you know you've been bad and you get a message saying we noticed you've been bad, the uneducated would self-report themselves which is as good as any competitor submitting a spam report.

If you don't have a clue what the message is referencing going to the forum and getting TC and/or Googlers to point out the errors of your ways works as well.

But in my experience the only action you need to do is ignore the references as they are already being ignored whatever they are.

I'll remind everyone that you need to be extremely cautious with Google's Notifications as an automated notification has no human intervention involved... the system detected something that may or may not be an issue but the system already took action so technically you don't need to do anything. Google prefers everyone to play fair so getting you to fairly show you're cheating is good for all.

In this event, the moment you send a reconsideration request into Google's Webspam Team that is the first indication that the team has that you believe you are/were doing something that violates their TOS.

You get that right?

You are telling Google [paraphrasing] "I've been cheating... can you take a look and see if you agree?"

Since Google notifications never tell you "verbatim" all the flaws you are left to guess... presumably the person that knows they are violating TOS knows what they have done but here's a news flash for you... Half of the all recoveries I have done have been manual reviews where over 75% of those had a PENGUIN issue first.

The owners had an automated issue that they misunderstood as needing to submit a reconsideration request out of ignorance... and then because Google sees much more that PENGUIN missed that turns into a manual review.

That was exactly my thought: That's my first Google's warning in my life and even with my ignorance in all that stuff I couldn't help but wonder: "Ok, so you didn't like some of my links and devalued them... Why on Earth am I supposed to take any action?"

Humans bit*h and complain about not wanting the government to be in our bedrooms, but those same humans set up cameras, mic's and post thoughts all day everyday...FB comes to mind. Government quires FB and the people do just what they want with no objection what so ever.
Stupid Humans lol